Olympus OM-D E-M5, E-M1, E-M10 - Mk1, Mk2 & Mk3 Owners Thread

Hello Jeff, it seems like the Panasonic pairing of the 12-35 and 35-100 might suit you plus perhaps a few faster primes for the street.
Perhaps the new Oly 17 (f/1.8) or the 12 (f/2) together with the Panasonic 25 f/1.4 and the Oly 45 (1.8)? There's lots of nice glass to choose from :)

Edit: It's worth noting that the 12-35 and 35-100 are both constant f/2.8 so relatively fast and sharp from wide open.
 
Last edited:
I'm new to this system but it strikes me that almost all of the zooms are quite slow (narrow max apertures). For me, the defining look of shots I like is shallow depth of field so I was forced to go for (fast) primes and I'm quite happy with my 20/2, 45/1.8 and 75/1.8. But if you are not so bothered about depth of field then the flexibility of the zooms comes into play.
 
Engineer73 said:
... I had only two lenses, both L zooms, a 24-70 mm and a 70-200 mm. There was not much need for lens changing and not much loss of image quality compared with primes. Would you all advise going the same zoom route with the EM5 or investing in primes. ...
Click to expand...
The newish Lumix 35-100F2.8 looks like a really good lens : no dissatisfied customers.
The shorter F2.8 zoom doesn't seem to get such a universal approval, and you've got a selection of nice and small primes in that range and some cheap but good zooms too, like the Lumix 14-45 for about £130 used.
 
Ulfric M Douglas said:
The shorter F2.8 zoom doesn't seem to get such a universal approval, and you've got a selection of nice and small primes in that range and some cheap but good zooms too, like the Lumix 14-45 for about £130 used.
Click to expand...
I disagree. The 12-35 is an excellent lens - 2 stops faster and constant aperture throughout the range as well as excellent IS which is 1-2 stops better than the 14-45. I use it all the time in places the 14-45 would be unusable.

The problem is that the 14-45 is such a good kit lens, the 12-35 doesn't do much better than it sharpness wise, and given the cost differential, people say it isn't "good value" as if sharpness is the overriding factor in anyones purchase decision for lenses.

The fact is that I can hand hold a 35mm shot at ISO200 with the 12-35 that would have needed ISO1600+ with the 14-45.

Of course, if you shoot everything at ISO200, f8 and 1/1000th the better light gathering properties of the lens won't matter, but I can count on one hand the days in a year that you can do this in the UK ;)
 
I agree, I'm very pleased with my 12-35, after some time with it now I would put it's image quality on par or close to my old 4/3rds Oly 12-60 which is a stunning zoom (with more reach).
 
After a great deal of thinking I've decided to jump into the world of the EM-5. I've researched most things, but I'm still undecided on one thing...

Kit Lens: Yes or No?

I already have the Panasonic 14mm 2.5 and Olympus 45mm 1.8 and don't mind gaps as I tend to shoot with primes. For a bit more than the extra cost of the kit lens bundle I could pick up the Panasonic 20mm 1.7.
 
ukaskew said:
After a great deal of thinking I've decided to jump into the world of the EM-5. I've researched most things, but I'm still undecided on one thing...

Kit Lens: Yes or No?

I already have the Panasonic 14mm 2.5 and Olympus 45mm 1.8 and don't mind gaps as I tend to shoot with primes. For a bit more than the extra cost of the kit lens bundle I could pick up the Panasonic 20mm 1.7.
Click to expand...

I think the 12-50 is pretty under rated, it's a flexible companion for the E-M5 offering wide to 50 (100mm FOV equiv to 35mm format).
It also has a none to shabby macro mode where the focal length is fixed at 43mm if my memory serves me correctly.
On top of all that it's weather and dust sealed to match the E-M5 body.
I would still have mine if I hadn't added the 12-35 and 35-100. My daughter now uses my old 12-50 with her E-PL2 :)
 
ukaskew said:
After a great deal of thinking I've decided to jump into the world of the EM-5. I've researched most things, but I'm still undecided on one thing...

Kit Lens: Yes or No?

I already have the Panasonic 14mm 2.5 and Olympus 45mm 1.8 and don't mind gaps as I tend to shoot with primes. For a bit more than the extra cost of the kit lens bundle I could pick up the Panasonic 20mm 1.7.
Click to expand...

Kit Lens: No.

IMVHO it has to be the Panny 14-45 if you want a decent kit lens.
 
My advice would be to study some samples taken with the lens and then make your mind up :)
 
The sensible advice is to try out the kit lens and see if it is good enough for you. The problem to consider is how strong willed you are - or will gear acquisition syndrome set in and mean you buy the kit lens now only to get the more expensive lens(es) later?
 
I pulled the trigger! Black OM-D, 12-50, Extra Battery and Case will be here on Thursday, can't wait. I never really settled with my G5, a few too many niggles that I just couldn't work around, so that's being sold.

I already have the 14mm, 45mm, 75mm and 100-300mm, but I very rarely use anything below 75mm, so I'm going to offload the 14 and 45 to offset the cost a bit.
 
Still growing into my OM-D. I got the grip today and it makes a lot of difference to me. I was struggling to hold the camera as it is so small and light. At the moment I've got both bits of the grip attached but guess I'll go for just the baisc version for everyday use.

I snapped this shot of City Point on my way home from work (with my 12/2). Three shot handheld HDR then Silver Efex Pro 2. Again, just a snap and nothing too considered but once closed down a tough this lens looks pretty sharp:

8533753137_cce61751f9_b.jpg


Edit: Flickr has made this darker than the original for some reason. Anyway, you get the idea of the shot
 
Last edited:
You wouldn't think the addition of a grip would make such a difference to a photographer but it has turned you into a proper pro. Nice shot. Sell me the 12/2. Please.
 
Ha! If only I had known. I wasted twenty years taking rubbish shots and all it took to make me brilliant was a grip. :)

I keep looking at your ad thinking whether I should sell you my 75 and 12. I feel a bit silly keeping Fuji and Olympus kits when I only dabble in this photography lark. But the OMD is growing on me so I'll hang on for a bit more.
 
As I haven't bought anything for a whole day and my wife is away so cannot see what I am doing, I'm looking for a flash for my OMD. Like the idea of wireless ttl but I also have cactus radio triggers for manual off camera work. Any recommendations?
 
Today is good day...


New Toy by Harry_S, on Flickr

Initial impressions are very positive (although I need the grip quickly!), the IBIS is so good it's scary. Hand holding the 75mm 1.8 and there is just no movement at all, I genuinely thought the EVF had frozen when I first half-pressed the shutter!
 
ukaskew said:
Today is good day...


New Toy by Harry_S, on Flickr

Initial impressions are very positive (although I need the grip quickly!), the IBIS is so good it's scary. Hand holding the 75mm 1.8 and there is just no movement at all, I genuinely thought the EVF had frozen when I first half-pressed the shutter!
Click to expand...

Enjoy, that is my favourite combination at the moment, the om-d and Oly 75 f1.8. ;)
 
ukaskew said:
Initial impressions are very positive (although I need the grip quickly!), the IBIS is so good it's scary. Hand holding the 75mm 1.8 and there is just no movement at all, I genuinely thought the EVF had frozen when I first half-pressed the shutter!
Click to expand...

Agreed - the grip is really needed with front heavy lenses like these.
 
I've spent about 3 hours going through the menus, I was thrilled to find you could change what each specific dial does, it's the little things that please me! The reason I moved over from the G5 was because I couldn't get comfortable with it in terms of control customization, but this seems to do nearly everything I want from it.

The one thing I badly miss is the Custom (C1/C2) modes on the main PASM dial, I've just set up the 'MySets' (i.e. MySet 2 has all my motorsport settings) but unless I'm missing something there is no way of quickly accessing them, and it's ridiculously easy to accidentally overwrite them!

If I could change ART and SCN on the PASM dial to Myset 1 and 2 I would be in heaven.
 
Last edited:
ukaskew said:
... If I could change ART and SCN on the PASM dial to Myset 1 and 2 I would be in heaven.
Click to expand...
Apparently the e-pL5 can assign one of the PASM modes to MySet ... the first Olympus to give this function ... I'm hoping the new proper Pen continues the trend.
 
ianmarsh said:
I'm new to this system but it strikes me that almost all of the zooms are quite slow (narrow max apertures). For me, the defining look of shots I like is shallow depth of field so I was forced to go for (fast) primes and I'm quite happy with my 20/2, 45/1.8 and 75/1.8. But if you are not so bothered about depth of field then the flexibility of the zooms comes into play.
Click to expand...

Ian

Thanks for this helpful comment. Following up on it I have read that one of the intrinsic problems with small sensors like that in the EM 5 is that the depth of field is inevitably larger than for example a full size or indeed an APS-C sensor. This pushes me in the direction of fast primes. Based on your experience have you any idea of the scale of the difference in depth of field between for example the f/2.8 zoom and the 45mm f/1.8 please?
 
The EM-5 doesn't have a 'small sensor'. In fact I think the difference in DOF between u4/3 and APS-C is less than a stop. There are various parameters which influence DOF, sensor size being just one of them, so manipulating the other factors will help.
 
arad85 said:
The fact is that I can hand hold a 35mm shot at ISO200 with the 12-35 that would have needed ISO1600+ with the 14-45.
Click to expand...

Andy

Thanks for your helpful comment. I just have one question. Is your observation just the effect of the f number of the lens of is there more to it?
 
Engineer73 said:
Ian

Thanks for this helpful comment. Following up on it I have read that one of the intrinsic problems with small sensors like that in the EM 5 is that the depth of field is inevitably larger than for example a full size or indeed an APS-C sensor. This pushes me in the direction of fast primes. Based on your experience have you any idea of the scale of the difference in depth of field between for example the f/2.8 zoom and the 45mm f/1.8 please?
Click to expand...

I don't I am afraid as I am new to Olympus and haven't tried one of the slower lenses but an on-line depth of field calculator will give you an idea. There are many parameters to play with though, including the lens and subject distance.

The comparatively small OMD sensor has the advantage of a larger depth of field for landscape shooters - my picture above of the tower block as pretty much in focus from top to bottom but was taken at f5.6 with the 12mm.

The disadvantage comes for me with head and shoulders portraits, my normal subject. I am looking at a shot of my daughter where her body is half turned to the camera and even with my 75/1.8 the whole of my daughter's face is in focus, as is her leading shoulder and her ear is only just starting to blur. Take this shot with an f2.8 lens and the whole of the head and some of the background is going to get sharp pretty quickly. I am very pleased with the shot but I know that I am not going to be able to get the shots I used to on a full frame with fast protrait lenses where the nose is blurred, eyes are sharp and the rest of the face is blurred. Maybe this isn't a big loss, of course.

If you can manipulate the distance between you, the subject and the background then you can still get a decent degree of subject isolation. But then the next issue is that while a 45mm lens on an OMD has an effective focal length of 90mm, the fall off in focus is slow and gradual because it is still a 45mm lens. Anything some distance from the zone of focus with a fast 90mm lens on a full frame sensor blurs completely because it is a telephoto lens. It doesn't with a 45mm lens on an m34 sensor even of the focal length looks similar because it is a (slight) wide-angle lens. I haven't explained that very well but I hope you get the idea.

m43 isn't a system that makes shallow depth of field shots easy to do and if you might want that look then I would strongly suggest looking at primes or a system with a bigger sensor.
 
Engineer73 said:
I just have one question. Is your observation just the effect of the f number of the lens of is there more to it?
Click to expand...
f stop (gives 2 stops at 35mm f2.8 vs f5.6) plus better IS system (at least 1 extra stop).
 
ianmarsh said:
I don't I am afraid as I am new to Olympus and haven't tried one of the slower lenses but an on-line depth of field calculator will give you an idea. There are many parameters to play with though, including the lens and subject distance.

The comparatively small OMD sensor has the advantage of a larger depth of field for landscape shooters - my picture above of the tower block as pretty much in focus from top to bottom but was taken at f5.6 with the 12mm.

The disadvantage comes for me with head and shoulders portraits, my normal subject. I am looking at a shot of my daughter where her body is half turned to the camera and even with my 75/1.8 the whole of my daughter's face is in focus, as is her leading shoulder and her ear is only just starting to blur. Take this shot with an f2.8 lens and the whole of the head and some of the background is going to get sharp pretty quickly. I am very pleased with the shot but I know that I am not going to be able to get the shots I used to on a full frame with fast protrait lenses where the nose is blurred, eyes are sharp and the rest of the face is blurred. Maybe this isn't a big loss, of course.

If you can manipulate the distance between you, the subject and the background then you can still get a decent degree of subject isolation. But then the next issue is that while a 45mm lens on an OMD has an effective focal length of 90mm, the fall off in focus is slow and gradual because it is still a 45mm lens. Anything some distance from the zone of focus with a fast 90mm lens on a full frame sensor blurs completely because it is a telephoto lens. It doesn't with a 45mm lens on an m34 sensor even of the focal length looks similar because it is a (slight) wide-angle lens. I haven't explained that very well but I hope you get the idea.

m43 isn't a system that makes shallow depth of field shots easy to do and if you might want that look then I would strongly suggest looking at primes or a system with a bigger sensor.
Click to expand...

Ian

This is a really useful practical reply. Your comment on the 45mm lens is particularly appropriate. As you rightly say it's not justdepth of field it's rate of fall off that is key.

I should say that the motivator for me to go to EM5 is the familiar one that my current equipment is just too heavy so I'm not taking it with me when I should and so I'm missing enjoyment.

From your comments it's clear that I should go with primes with the largest f number I can afford to give me the best opportunity of at least playing with depth of field to some degree while accepting that the result won't be perfect. If I might ask which lens did you start with and what have you now?

Maybe I shouldn't say this on this thread but I guess if depth of field is a deal breaker and I want a small light camera it's the Sony RX1 that fits the bill. Of course it's limited to one lens and is mega expensive although some of the pictures from it are phenomenal. Did you consider it?

Best wishes

Jeff
 
You shouldn't really have problems getting limited DoF from MFT. I don't.

If you want limited DoF the same rules apply as with any other format... use a wide aperture... a long focal length... and if you're still struggling decrease your camera to subject distance.

My shallow DoF tool of choice is often a legacy 55mm f1.7, my Voigtlander 25mm f0.95 gives reeeeealy shallow DoF too especially when I use it close in.

Engineer73 said:
Ian

Maybe I shouldn't say this on this thread but I guess if depth of field is a deal breaker and I want a small light camera it's the Sony RX1 that fits the bill. Of course it's limited to one lens and is mega expensive although some of the pictures from it are phenomenal. Did you consider it?

Best wishes

Jeff
Click to expand...

What's your problem? If you post some examples maybe someone will be able to help.
 
Last edited:
Engineer73 said:
Ian

This is a really useful practical reply. Your comment on the 45mm lens is particularly appropriate. As you rightly say it's not justdepth of field it's rate of fall off that is key.

I should say that the motivator for me to go to EM5 is the familiar one that my current equipment is just too heavy so I'm not taking it with me when I should and so I'm missing enjoyment.

From your comments it's clear that I should go with primes with the largest f number I can afford to give me the best opportunity of at least playing with depth of field to some degree while accepting that the result won't be perfect. If I might ask which lens did you start with and what have you now?

Maybe I shouldn't say this on this thread but I guess if depth of field is a deal breaker and I want a small light camera it's the Sony RX1 that fits the bill. Of course it's limited to one lens and is mega expensive although some of the pictures from it are phenomenal. Did you consider it?

Best wishes

Jeff
Click to expand...

Hi jeff,

I had a canon 5D2 with lots if fast lenses but Fancied a change.I went into a shop intending to try a 5D3 but didn't like the feel of it. Instead I picked up a Fuji XPro1 with the 35mm (50 equiv). Lovely, but the fuji is slow to operate. I really rate the fuji stuff highly but you take a shot when the camera is ready, not necessarily when you want to.

So I got the OMD with a 45mm lens. It is ok but not close to the canon L lenses. Then I saw a 75mm and 12mm, bought both and would put them up with the best. I contemplate the Leica Panasonic 25/1.4 but the fuji 35 covers this length for me.

I didn't think about the Sony. Too expensive and I like telephoto a more than wide angles. I've had two fuji x100 and would go that way again.

Best combo of small size and good quality with fast lenses - fuji xpro1, for me. But the focus system is annoying and isn't everyone's cup of tea. If you are ever in north London you are welcome to come and try out the two systems side by side.
 
ianmarsh said:
So I got the OMD with a 45mm lens. It is ok but not close to the canon L lenses.
Click to expand...

If you want Canon L quality lenses you have to pay. AFAIK there are two 45mm lenses in MFT fit, one is the Oly f1.8 which is about £220 and at that price no one should expect cutting edge performance and the other is a Panasonic f2.8 macro carrying the Leica name which seem to get good reviews.
 
woof woof said:
If you want Canon L quality lenses you have to pay. AFAIK there are two 45mm lenses in MFT fit, one is the Oly f1.8 which is about £220 and at that price no one should expect cutting edge performance and the other is a Panasonic f2.8 macro carrying the Leica name which seem to get good reviews.
Click to expand...

Fully agree. The 45/1.8 compares to the canon 85/1.8 which is in the same price ballpark. And the more expensive oly lenses compare with the more expensive equivalents. You get what you pay for.
 
Last edited:
See there's a thing... I think the 45 f/1.8 is a rather excellent lens without considering the price. Perhaps it's sample variation but mine produces very sharp output (y)

Here's a representative review from the well respected Lenstip website.
 
Greytop said:
See there's a thing... I think the 45 f/1.8 is a rather excellent lens without considering the price. Perhaps it's sample variation but mine produces very sharp output (y)
Click to expand...

Mine too, it is lovely. But buy the 75mm on offer in the classifieds at an excellent price (not mine) and see the improvement!

I don't always agree with the style of testing but this comparison of the 45 and Canikon "equivalents" shows their, erm, equivalence:

http://www.dxomark.com/index.php/Pu...eviews/Olympus-M.-Zuiko-Digital-ED-45mm-f-1.8
 
Ian

Fully agree on the 5D. I looked at it before I decided to downsize and thought the technology was getting in the way of the photographic experience.
Many thanks for the offer to help me compare the X1Pro and the EM5 but I don’t think I will need to impose on you. As it happens I was able to spend an hour with both cameras in John Lewis yesterday with a very helpful salesperson. Obviously it is not an ideal environment but it was useful. I liked the simplicity of the X1 but its operation is slow as you said and I found it irritating too. Apparently my Lightroom software will have trouble with RAW files from the X1 as well. Also there is no IBIS and no dioptre adjustment. Overall it’s just too quirky for me. I think I will go with the EM5 which I really liked and will probably start with the Leica Panasonic 45mm.
Now I have to keep control of myself and sell my Canon stuff before I splash out on the 5!
I looked on your blog. The photos are really excellent. Were any made with the EM5?

Best wishes

Jeff
 
XE 1 does have has dioptre adjustment and believe raws are ok with lightroom now.:)
 
Finally took my EM-5 for a walk today, aside from still really needing a grip I'm very happy with it, also surprisingly pleased with 12-50mm kit lens, the macro mode is far more, er, macro than I expected.

The only thing that's slightly bothered me is the fairly aggressive looking processing on JPEGs, are there any recomended adjustments?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top